My son was born by caesarean section, although my wife and I really wanted our son born vaginally. My wife's friend has had two successful vaginal births. She wants the third child to be born by caesarean section. This is just because delivery by caesarean section is simple.

This situation makes me very curious about what the differences actually are between a child who was delivered vaginally and a child delivered by caesarean section. I heard from others that children from vaginal births have more resilient bodies and are smarter than children who were born by caesarean section.

Are these claims scientifically proven? Are there really any differences? Good references would be helpful.

I have not previously encountered the term "sectio caesare". I have always heard it described as "caesarean section". Whichever term is more widely recognized should be used in the title of the question. Can anyone provide more information about which term is more globally accepted/recognizable?
–
BeofettJul 25 '12 at 13:23

Sectio caesare is (I think) the term used in some European languages such as German, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese. I think we should change it to match the language of the rest of the question. @kalingga, is this okay with you?
–
dewordeJul 25 '12 at 14:11

@Beofett I think both terms should be included in the title if "sectio caesare" is common in Europe. Also, I want to mention that indicating that c-sections are not "normal" births is contentious for some people, and that perhaps kalingga would prefer to use "vaginal" birth, since that is more descriptive and accurate.
–
Kit Z. FoxJul 25 '12 at 17:24

7

I cannot imagine choosing major abdominal surgery and being unable to even get up to lift your baby for several days after delivery. The toll on the mother is important to consider. C-sections are wonderful when needed, but just because...?
–
justktJul 26 '12 at 13:47

7

"delivery by caesarean section is simple" = a c-section, while common, is still major surgery. It's hardly 'simple'.
–
DA01May 2 '13 at 2:59

3 Answers
3

While there are a wide range of articles about the benefits of vaginal birth, which appear to include better expulsion of fluid from the lungs, better immune response in childhood and so on, there doesn't seem to be any definite medical proof. Have a look at this unresolved question over on Skeptics.

There doesn't appear to be any indication that children born through vaginal childbirth are any smarter, either. After the initial childhood stages it doesn't appear to be possible to identify which individuals were Caesarian or natural.

Caesarian sections do have a major effect on the mother, however - major abdominal surgery means the mother can't lift things, drive, or even move easily for many weeks.

Don't forget that C-sections can also mean that the baby's head isn't mashed by passage through the birth canal, that the mother has much lower risk of episiotomy, and it can save the life of the mother and/or baby in the event of a problematic birth.
–
mmrJul 25 '12 at 13:38

3

Anecdotal: when we were debating this issue with the gynaecologist for our first, he opined that if men gave birth there would only ever by Caesarian sections.
–
BenjolJul 26 '12 at 12:57

4

@Benjol: Har har. That is a silly joke because it does not make any sense at all. A large portion of pregnant women desire a natural birth; even those who already are mothers.
–
Torben Gundtofte-BruunJul 26 '12 at 13:42

3

@TorbenGundtofte-Bruun, I think he was implying that men's resistance to pain is vastly inferior to women's, though that's probably a question for skeptics.SE...
–
BenjolJul 26 '12 at 13:46

1

A friend of my had kidney stones while pregnant, bad enough that she had surgery to have them removed. According to her, vaginal birth was a cake-walk compared to kidney stones!
–
MarcMar 7 '14 at 0:02

In the sense that both methods' outcome is a happy, healthy mom and baby, the difference is none.

Babies who are born vaginally receive crucial beneficial bacteria from their mother's birth canal that are necessary to populate the gut. This could explain why there is growing evidence that babies born via c-section are more likely to develop asthma and allergies. Here is a link to an article that describes research on the topic.

A C-section I suppose is easier in the delivery room, but you pay the price during recovery. So, a child who is born vaginally has the advantage of a mother who will be on her feet sooner (not to say c-section mom's are lazy or neglectful or anything like that, please don't infer that meaning! Its a MAJOR surgery-anyone would need time to recover, even tough-as-nails females of our species.) Pain medication is also required after a major surgery like that, and they all have side effects on the baby (if a mother is nursing).

It really feels like your first sentence contradicts the rest of your post.
–
EkoostikMartinDec 24 '14 at 16:33

@EkoostikMartin the first sentence is not contradictory. I was referring not to the immediate outcome, but to the longer term outcome. Many women feel a sense of failure or guilt if they can't, for whatever reason, deliver vaginally. So, the first sentence also serves as a statement of neutrality so as not to further compound those feelings if they exist in any potential readers of this post.
–
JaxDec 24 '14 at 19:45